Animal Rescue- Emergency or Not?

[Guest MRK303]

I just heard a department get dispatched for an animal rescue (Non-emergency). If an animal falls through the ice, do you consider that an emergency or not? Personally, I think it's an emergency if a dog falls through the ice.

[Guest seanc]

i would consider it an emergency, yes if their was a reported structure fire then that would take priority but yes i would want my department responding on a call such as a pet falling through ice.

[Remember585 815]

To me, an emergency means the threat of a loss of life, a human life. Don't get me wrong, I love dogs and cats, but if I was a Chief Officer I would not let my apparatus respond emergency mode nor would I risk the lives of my people for an animal. If there was a dog on ice in need of rescue I would do whatever we could with our resources without risking the lives of my personnel. I can't allow myself to attend a LODD Funeral for trying to save a pet. Nor can I see the need to go lights and sirens to help - it's a public assistance call, much like a pump-out or lock-out, and those to me are not emergencies.

Hate me if you want, but imagine telling a woman and her kids that Daddy died while trying to get to a dog on a pond or up on a ladder fetching someone's cat.

And for the record this isn't a dig at any one incident or one agency, I feel this way strongly only because I think we take enough risks as it is, why add to it?

Edited March 15, 2007 by Remember585

[Guest]

To be honest - the only incident i ever heard (live) was the deer rescue in Carmel. While im not an over the top animal finatic, i am a pet owner and love my cat to death. Granted, i consider myself a "do it yourselfer" so if my cat happned to get stuck in a tree (shes indoor so thats not a bother!) i would probably pull out the old extension ladder. If i couldn't get it, i might consider calling the fire department (the house line). While it's not an "explicit" service that i pay them to preform, it seems to be somthing they should help out with. Afterall if i get a "welness" check - which 9 out of 10 times turns into a short discussion, maybe a cup of coffee with the resident - i still go. If i were to get a job, i would simply explain that i'm needed elsewhere and carry on.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

I'm with 585 on this one and do not consider it to fall under the definition of a "true emergency" as outline in NYS V & T law. I would highly doubt that you could have a good defense in the event you had a significant accident and were sued that you were responding under the provisions set forth in V & T law as an emergency vehicle. I too am a dog lover, I have 2 loving dogs myself, however I do not feel that risking personnel's lives, a 6 digit cost of a fire apparatus and the risks to the general public on the roads for an animal. If this was the case, we would have ambulances respond when an animal got hit by a vehicle, were rabid or what have you.

Risk vs. Benefit. Is the risk worth the benefit. In your scenario I would have to say no. Using another call as "taking priority," right there sums up the answer. One alarm at a time, if you are responding to an "emergency" then that is the priority nothing else trumps that. That is what other units are for.

[Bunkers 0]

Als,

you love your dogs? I would NEVER get that impression.. lol

As far as this call that happened tonight with the dog through ice, I am almost certain that it went out as a non emergency call. Dont quote me on that but I think thats what it was.

In any event, its good training

[Stewie 1]

Isn't part of the job prevention as well? If you leave a dog in the ice someone is going to try and get it out and may end up falling through themselves.

[Bunkers 0]

Sorry MRK303 I bypassed (Non Emergency) in your post.

Stewie, thats a great point.

[Guest MRK303]

thanks for the feedback!

[Stewie 1]

At the class I went to for ice rescue they said that they recomended an animal resue as an emergency for that reason

[Remember585 815]

At the class I went to for ice rescue they said that they recomended an animal resue as an emergency for that reason

←

If we tried to prevent every stupid person from every stupid act we would go insane, then eventually be out of work. ALS said it best - risk vs. gain. What would you say to a member's family if they were to get killed trying to rescue a dog? Think about that... I know I won't ever put myself or my brothers and sisters in that situation.

[Guest]

Iv'e been to a few of these. If a pet is through the ice eventually it will turn into people through the ice. If it can be done safely I feel it should be done. Some year ago I went to one with a dog, than a young girl and than two police officers falling into deep water and ice. Luckily they all survived. I would say an animinal rescue is an emergency.

[RWC130 594]

Remember585,

Well said..... I agree.

I have a dog and a cat. I love animals and I would go out

of my way to save one but SAFETY FIRST!

ALS,

Remember when we saved the Rabbit? haha

Poor bird was not so lucky.

EVERYONE GOES HOME...

[Guest partyrock]

another voice for the pile. Non emergency, but you definately have to go. I love my dog more than a few family members, but she's still just a dog.

[ckroll 101]

Interesting topic. An underlying theme that deserves discussion shows up frequently in both fire and ems: Should we only respond to 'high value' assignments and what constitutes 'value'?

I am unmoved by the 'what do you tell the family of a member who dies...' logic which is as emotionally charged as it is meaningless. We respond to wires down, pump outs, brush fires, minor PIAA's. Immediate threats to human life are rare. None of us should be putting our lives on the line for any of it.

The implication is that going into a burning building for a sofa in flames somehow has value where going out on ice after a dog or a deer does not... that sounds silly.

If we are to restrict responses only to human life threats, it is a slippery slope. Do we then restrict our responses only to life threats that do not involve stupid behavior? Now we're down to one or two calls a year.

When a person calls for aid, it is because THEY think they have an emergency. Whether it is large or small to us should not be the issue. Our job is to train, to be prepared so that these things are not a risk to our lives or anyone elses.

In almost 20 years as a fire fighter and EMT, one of my finest moments was handing a purring tabby cat [that was brought out not breathing and unresponsive] back to a woman who had just lost her home to a fire. It was the only thing that mattered to her.... and it should be the only thing that matters to us.

[robert benz 344]

If we tried to prevent every stupid person from every stupid act we would go insane, then eventually be out of work.  ALS said it best - risk vs. gain.  What would you say to a member's family if they were to get killed trying to rescue a dog?  Think about that...  I know I won't ever put myself or my brothers and sisters in that situation.

←

here's my 2 cents for the dog thru the ice call, there is no more risk to your personal if you are trained and ready to respond, than if it were a person thru the ice. either you have the equipment and training or you dont. what great PR you will usually get for saving someones pet, it is nothing less than a chance to use your training and skills for ice rescue. we have been to numerous calls for pets and wild animals in need and for the most part we were able to help, with no injuries to our members.

[GAW6 66]

I think CKROLL said it best! I agree totally!!!

[helicopper 1,050]

Interesting topic.  An underlying theme that deserves discussion shows up frequently in both fire and ems:  Should we only respond to 'high value' assignments and what constitutes 'value'?

I am unmoved by the 'what do you tell the family of a member who dies...' logic which is as emotionally charged as it is meaningless.  We respond to wires down, pump outs, brush fires, minor PIAA's.  Immediate threats to human life are rare.  None of us should be putting our lives on the line for any of it.

The implication is that going into a burning building for a sofa in flames somehow has value where going out on ice after a dog or a deer does not... that sounds silly.

If we are to restrict responses only to human life threats, it is a slippery slope.  Do we then restrict our responses only to life threats that do not involve stupid behavior? Now we're down to one or two calls a year.

When a person calls for aid, it is because THEY think they have an emergency.  Whether it is large or small to us should not be the issue.  Our job is to train, to be prepared so that these things are not a risk to our lives or anyone elses.

In almost 20 years as a fire fighter and EMT, one of my finest moments was handing a purring tabby cat [that was brought out not breathing and unresponsive] back to a woman who had just lost her home to a fire.  It was the only thing that mattered to her.... and it should be the only thing that matters to us.

←

Very well said! I agree with you and Robert Benz wholeheartedly.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Bob great post.

Some I think are mixing apples with oranges and I believe it was the way the first post was formulated.

You have to treat this as an emergency on scene. It is an ice rescue after all and only trained persons should be conducting it. No different if you are doing ice rescue training, you are creating in sense an actual ice rescue and cannot half a** anything.

CKroll...you have some decent points...but I also have to use one of your lines and say emotionally and professionally charged..but I'm not moved.

That tabby you saved...was because the risk vs benefit was there. If the conditions didn't warrant it based on size up, we don't go after a human. In fact when I instructor, looking for animals isn't very high up on the lecture or skill part. If you see one so be it...but I've made the mistake as a younger firefighter of rushing to "my baby is in there." Now I know to ask the "baby's" name and if its fefe or fluffy, "I'll do the best I can maam." Every other call type you name and identify the way I read perhaps as not being "high value" fits into either 1 or several of the 3 incident priorities.

1. Life Safety (as I say 1a us....1b them)

2. Incident stabilization

3. Property Conservation

Wires down, pump outs, fluid spills all fit into 1 of those if not mulitple. And guess what I'll even say that all 3 of those warrant a non-emergency response by personnel. Right along with the dog in the ice.

As RBenz said the most important thing is doing it right. I have done animal rescues, I've also had conflict with a couple I was on because caution got thrown to the wind with following proper procedure and standards. You have to stay sharp at all times.

[ckroll 101]

Indeed, the cat was rescued because she was stepped on, by someone else, during overhaul. That the save was accidental makes it no less gratifying to the homeowner, or the cat.

My question is, do we/should we assign value to responses? A recurring theme in emergency response is a sense among some that certain situations are more or less deserving. I have yet to be won over to the argument.

[Guest]

I have to agree with ALS on this one. But can you imagine getting to the seen and you have a crowd of 25 to 50 people looking on as the dog is struggleing to stay afloat, I wouldn't want to be the cheif that tells the owner and the crowd that its not his responsibilitly to get the dog out then packs up and leaves. After the paper and news people get a hold of this kiss your support money goodbye for awhile. My personal opionion its an emergency and tackel it as long as it can be done safely and use it as a training rescue as if it where a person out there. I know alot of you guys don't think the fire department should care about what the public thinks but after 911 alot of people look up to us. We are paid by the public career or volunteer and I don't think it would hurt alittle to show some good publicity even if some of you don't think so. Where is the line drawn well thats up to the situation and the cheif to make that call.

[Guest partyrock]

I know alot of you guys don't think the fire department should care about what the public thinks but after 911 alot of people look up to us. We are paid by the public career or volunteer and I don't think it would hurt alittle to show some good publicity even if some of you don't think so. Where is the line drawn well thats up to the situation and the cheif to make that call.

←

You're right JB, we are here to serve the public intrest. If in the moment they deem that dog out on the ice or cat up in the tree worthy of rescue then its our job to safely effect that rescue in a timely manner.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

My question is, do we/should we assign value to responses? A recurring theme in emergency response is a sense among some that certain situations are more or less deserving. I have yet to be won over to the argument.

The second leading cause of death of firefighters in this country every year involves responding/returning. Not to mention the amount of rebound accidents of other vehicles on the roads caused during our responses. Should we assign priorities...yes. Are there guidelines out there for other types of emergency services responses...yes. EMS has priority guidelines, many police agencies have systems which assign a priority to their calls. Why should the fire service be any different. I have to ask if not us...who else? Then again based on how "vivaciously" the fire service actually proceeds with change, even when it makes sense perhaps we need someone else to do it for us. Tradition is a wonderful thing...unless it involves operational issues which then bogs you down.

I'm not exactly sure where you get the sense that "certain situations are more or less deserving." I believe in the customer service aspect of emergency services and if anyone is using those words I would have to say that I find it less then professional. I for one am not saying certain situations are less deserving. What I am saying is that we need to make smart, sound choices on how we respond to such, for firefighter and public safety. That is not saying they are less deserving, it is saying that there is no need to utilize a emergency response for something that is not a true emergency, putting the driver/operator, any crew on board and the surrounding public at risk.

Finally another topic with great conversation and professionalism. Keep it up gang! Remember....

1. Its not your emergency

2. The garbage man doesn't get excited when he comes around the corner and sees garbage cans. Neither should we when we see fire. They don't speed up to get to the route...so why do we blast away for hurry up and wait?

[Guest]

Ck - i think i understand what your saying. I think inadvertently there are "assigned values" for different calls. I don't know anything about fire, but i do know some things about EMS - so ill stick with that. Many agencies/municipalities/counties/whatever are moving towards a tiered response or priority dispatch. In Putnam its Alpha - Echo, Alpha being your uncomplicated falls/break/sprains/general malaise which does not receive a Paramedic unit while your Echo calls involve cardiac arrest/respiritory arrest/choking which does merit a Paramedic response. Priority 1 - 4 follow similar guidelines i imagine. Given that there is only so many paramedics/ambulances/fire engines/firefighters/etc. there has to be protocol in place to best utilize the resources available. Often that means prioritizing (or setting a value to - i think the two phrases are interchangeable here) calls. It's like saying, oh your not feeling well and wanna go to the ER, no problem well send you an ambulance but its really not that important/life threatening where you need advanced intervention.

If a dog or cat is stuck in the tree send an engine or ladder if you can spare one - in non-emergency mode of course - and see if they cant help out. Like i said before, ive been sent on wellness checks that turn into a cup of coffee and a short conversation, its part of the job and should be taken in stride.

The bottom line is no one can tell someone else what is and isn't an emergency to them. To someone it may be their grandfather having an MI and to someone else its fluffy up in the tree. The fact is, there just are not enough resources to to give everyone a BLS unit with 2 EMTs and a Paramedic or everyone an engine or ladder regardless of nature. It's the nature of the beast.